Actually, when I speak of change, I don't mean a change in policy from republican to democratic policies, but rather a change in the way our government goes about operating, and the influence special interests have. While I disagree with you that McCain's policies are the same as Bush's, I'll grant you they are more in line with Bush's than with Obama's. McCain is proposing more of the standard republican economic policies and Obama is espousing more of the standard democrat policies.

BOTH are failed policies in my opinion. Giving tax breaks to the wealthy without evening the interntional trade structures and while allowing other countries to artificially depress their currency values so that the dollar is hurt, without measures to counteract that through forceful and fair international trade policy will result in jobs being exported and our trade balance being negatively affected. However, taxing the wealthy disproportionately will simply lead to lost jobs and lessen the entrepreneurial aspect of our economy.

As for the war policies, unfortunately, Bush allowed the war be politicized, and most Democrats were all too willing to do everything in their power to hurt Bush by using the war. It's a shame that our leaders are willing to do that and put their political aspirations and those of their parties above those of the Country. While I don't think McCain is completey free of that unfortunate characteristic, I do think he is about as good as we have in Congress and certainly in this race with respect to that issue. You can argue that the war was misguided, and there are plenty of pros and cons that way, but once we are in a war, EVERY member of our government SHOULD be focussed on VICTORY and working together to achieve it. Unfortunately, and shamefully, IMO, our politicians are almost unanimously bankrupt in this principle. While I credit Bush for his resolve to continue on with an unpopular war, as I agree that we must win, much of this situation we find our selves in falls on Bush's shoulders for his poor communication and inability to rise above the political mess that is Washington and rally the country, and much of that is true because of the faulty way they prosecuted the war once they decided to go in (Bush gave too much credence to Rumsfeld IMO).

McCain energy policies are not just to drill drill drill, they are much more than that. They include renewable resources, alternative energy sources and some conservation. But it's INSANITY to have resources here in our own country and to leave them untapped, while at the same time being held hostage by those oil rich countries that hate us. The environmental concerns are folly. We have the technology to drill with little affect to the environment, the ANWAR issue is so misrepresented, and for every day we put off tapping into our own resources, it is another day that we weaken ourselves as a country, IMO. And it's so intellectually contradictory to say we can develop the technology for all these alternative energies, and to ignore that we have developed some and can develop more technology to minimize our environmental impacts on drilling. Had we done it 10 to 15 years ago, we might have the ability today to utilize some of those resources today, which in turn would have lessened our dependence on Middle East Oil, which in turn would have lessened the importance to us of a democratic and peaceful Middle East which in turn would have freed up much of the money we're spending today to fight these wars, which in turn would have allowed the US to instead use that money to AID those who want peace and democracy in those Countries so that they could have enacted change on their own and to ALSO use that money to fund and promote the development and commercialization of alternative Energy resources, etc. etc. etc. The talking points of both parties want us to focus on a 15 second sound bite that will make us feel good or feel bad about one or the other's platform, but unfortunately never goes deep into the real issues and the cause and effect of the policy initiatives.

Your last point speaks more to the type of change that I believe we need. Washington NEEDS to be shaken up. They NEED to know that their spending and corruption has to be curtailed. They NEED to have their mindset REFOCUSSED to being SERVANTS of the people, not to being served BY the people. Based on what I hear from Obama, while seeming to raise the standard a bit with respect to political discourse and being an eloquent speaker and possibly and inspirational leader, I see TOO MUCH of the beholdenness to his party, to the idea that government will provide the solutions, rather than empowering people to develop our own solutions, and to the approach that to close the income and societal class gap, it's necessary to limit, and in fact knock down a peg, those at the top so that the middle and bottom can catch up a little, rather than to promote a philosophy that ALL can move forward and upward and the best role government can play is to promote a strong education system so that we can do for ourselves and each other, rather than have the government provide it to us.

To me, where others see McCain as more of the same, I also see Obama as more of the same. Where others see Clinton's terms as successful due to budget surplusses, I see the government tax structures being elevated due to falsified corporate earnings a la Enron and the like and misplaced spending that ultimately crushed our intelligence gathering capabilities and weakened our military. Where others see Reagan as a beacon of light that guides their policies and economic philosophies, I see an administration that spurred growth simply by injecting so much government spending into the economy that we'll spend a genration trying to undo the damage.

The type of change we need is to stream line our government back down to the fundamentals for which it was established and to remember from what it was seeking refuge that inspired this nation's founding. I don't think John McCain is necessarily the man that will get us there, but I think he is someone who has a chance of getting us at least pointed in the right direction. While I would like to see the "image" of Barrack Obama have a chance to be president, I personally think at this stage of his life, he is too inexperienced to handle it, and to beholden to the party establishment that got him to where he is to be able to overcome it. And I don't see anything in his record to show that he would depart from the Democrat party as usual philosophies. I DO see that from McCain, so considering his experience, his age, and his willingness to battle his own party, that's why I see McCain as more likely to succeed at providing some change. But to me change is defined as a departure from BOTH the republican and democratic platforms, and instead an apolitical amalgamation of the best of both of them and of independent thought. How's that for idealism?! lol